Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
cmriverside wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »yes that is why I am confident we do have it under control in South Australia - and most other australian states.
Because very low number of new cases is not a reflection of less testing - in fact the opposite - as of a week ago, anyone with any flu like symptoms, no matter how mild, can be tested.
Of course there is the possibility of infected people not getting tested - but given high numbers of tests being done and very low numbers of community transmission, that would seem unlikely.
There is also possibility of false negatives - but I guess one has to have some trust in the system - and again very low numbers of community transmission would suggest it is extremely unlikely people are falsely testing negative - because if that were so, they would falsely be getting all clear to go to work etc - and we would see more flow on cases with no known contact cause.
Social restrictions remain in place - but not as tight as some places, including eastern states of Australia.
All incoming people , with very few exceptions, whether from overseas or interstate, must self quarnatine for 14 days.
Yep, same for NZ - so much as a sniffle and you can get tested, and that will continue as restrictions lift. People are being encouraged to contact their GP or Healthline as soon as they feel unwell, because maintaining control requires identifying and isolating any new cases plus close contacts as quickly as possible.
We had a bit of a dip in numbers being tested (Australia did too), simply because there are fewer respiratory illnesses circulating due to the restrictions in place. We haven't actually had any days where full testing capacity was reached (day before yesterday was the highest, with 5289 tests processed, only 6 came back positive).
Here, we have a category of 'probable', for where a test result has come back negative, but all clinical signs point to COVID-19. So of our 1451 total, 338 are probable cases.
Wait. Are you saying they think the testing is not catching the Covid 19 cases, or....what does this mean? I mean, the virus is sequenced..it is or it isn't - pretty cut and dry. I don't get that "probable."
Of course, "probably" a lot of not-tested infected people and a lot who had it and recovered and never got tested.
Lots of ways this can be an majorly imperfect test system because people and chaos.
Probables are people who are symptomatic of COVID-19, clinicians feel likely do have it (possibly due to having close contact with a confirmed case as well as being symptomatic), but for whatever reason, the test came back negative. No test is 100% reliable, and the COVID-19 nose swab test requires getting enough tissue cells on the swab. Some people likely to have it haven't been tested (eg, one of our clusters involved patients in a dementia ward, putting them through testing would have been hugely traumatic, and not changed their treatment, nor the outcome).
From our Ministry of Health case definition:
Probable case
• A case that meets the clinical criteria where other known aetiologies that fully explain the clinical
presentation have been excluded and either has laboratory suggestive evidence or for whom testing
for SARS-CoV-2 is inconclusive, or
• a close contact of a confirmed case that either meets the clinical criteria and for whom testing cannot
be performed, or
• a is a negative result but a public health risk assessment indicates they should be classified as a
probable case.
Laboratory suggestive evidence requires detection of coronavirus from a clinical specimen using pancoronavirus NAAT (PCR).
Full case definition: https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/covid-19-case_definitions16april2020.pdf2 -
Apparently there are a number of false negatives. Ross Douthat (the conservative NYT columnist) thinks he, his wife, and his son all had it, but Ross's test came back negative and his son's inconclusive, and at that point they were on the mend so did not retest. He was discussing the false negative issue on one of the episodes of his podcast (The Argument).
Actual REAL false negatives or someone like Douthat insisting that he is right and the test is wrong. I mean, that's pretty arrogant.
Kind of like me insisting me and my cat had it even though we didn't get tested?
3 -
cmriverside wrote: »Apparently there are a number of false negatives. Ross Douthat (the conservative NYT columnist) thinks he, his wife, and his son all had it, but Ross's test came back negative and his son's inconclusive, and at that point they were on the mend so did not retest. He was discussing the false negative issue on one of the episodes of his podcast (The Argument).
Actual REAL false negatives or someone like Douthat insisting that he is right and the test is wrong. I mean, that's pretty arrogant.
Kind of like me insisting me and my cat had it even though we didn't get tested?
Yes, there is some evidence that there are a number of false negatives (it's not uncommon for tests). He discusses that in the podcast.
Here's one example: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/21/838794281/study-raises-questions-about-false-negatives-from-quick-covid-19-test
Another, probably more relevant to Ross's case: https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/04/06/false-negative
(And I'm not convinced Ross had it, I'm just not ruling out the possibility that he did, as with the NZ gov't and their probables.)3 -
In passing, I heard some discussion of false negatives and false positives on NPR today (at least I think it was today). I wasn't listening all that closely but there was some aspect about looking at the genetic sequences, and how the sequences have similarities to other coronaviruses, so possibly some tests produce ambiguous/unconfirmed results.0
-
I didn't have a chance to look back through all the posts today but wondered if anyone highlighted the fact that here in CA (Santa Clara County) based on autopsy results of people who died at home, we had a COVID-19 death on Feb 7 and another on Feb 17 as confirmed by the CDC. The virus was here earlier than we thought apparently.
I've maintained my suspicion that my husband had COVID-19 in early February after we returned from a trip to SF from Jan 24 to 27. We flew in and out of Oakland, ate at 3 different restaurants, went wine tasting and went on an ice cream tour. About a week after we got home hubby was sick, fever, night sweats, lethargy, and a slight cough. He made an appointment at the doctor after about 6 days of being sick but woke up that morning feeling better and cancelled the appointment.
I'm not counting on the possibility that he had it, and possibly me too, even though I really didn't feel sick, but it would be nice to know. Hoping to get him the antibody test when it becomes widely available. Our daughter and 2 year old grandson (in Golden, Co) said they will be on a plane heading to CA the day after we get those results.
So many questions and so few answers!3 -
fitlulu4150 wrote: »I didn't have a chance to look back through all the posts today but wondered if anyone highlighted the fact that here in CA (Santa Clara County) bases on autopsy results of people who died at home, we had a COVID-19 death on Feb 7 and another on Feb 17 as confirmed by the CDC. The virus was here earlier than we thought apparently.
I just read a article on that. It spreading in CA by Jan seems somewhat likely at this point, and the first (2/7) death was someone who traveled a lot and worked for a company with people who traveled from Wuhan, as I understand it. So seems plausible.
The first identified case of person to person spread in Chicago (a man whose wife traveled to Wuhan) was on Jan 30, so it being earlier in CA seems quite likely to me and I'm not sure why this is being presented as surprising.
Unfortunately, the current discussion also seems to be that having it, especially a mild case, quite likely does not convey immunity.5 -
cmriverside wrote: »Apparently there are a number of false negatives. Ross Douthat (the conservative NYT columnist) thinks he, his wife, and his son all had it, but Ross's test came back negative and his son's inconclusive, and at that point they were on the mend so did not retest. He was discussing the false negative issue on one of the episodes of his podcast (The Argument).
Actual REAL false negatives or someone like Douthat insisting that he is right and the test is wrong. I mean, that's pretty arrogant.
Kind of like me insisting me and my cat had it even though we didn't get tested?
Look up specificity and sensitivity. All lab tests have a degree of error with false positives and false negatives. I don't have time to explain it at the moment, but will try to get back to this later.8 -
Unfortunately, the current discussion also seems to be that having it, especially a mild case, quite likely does not convey immunity.
Yes, that's why we're not super excited about the possibility that we may have had it already. Especially for me, since I didn't show much in the way of symptoms, other than a slight headache and a bit of a fever.
We're not counting on immunity yet, or ever, to be honest. I remember my daughter calling me from CO on March 3 (she's a scientist) telling me we had to cancel our Easter/Birthday reunion here at our house with the entire family because she predicted we would all be both exposed and probably contract it in the next several months. She's not a virologist though so who knows right? We did heed her warning though and started physical distancing early in March.
6 -
cmriverside wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »yes that is why I am confident we do have it under control in South Australia - and most other australian states.
Because very low number of new cases is not a reflection of less testing - in fact the opposite - as of a week ago, anyone with any flu like symptoms, no matter how mild, can be tested.
Of course there is the possibility of infected people not getting tested - but given high numbers of tests being done and very low numbers of community transmission, that would seem unlikely.
There is also possibility of false negatives - but I guess one has to have some trust in the system - and again very low numbers of community transmission would suggest it is extremely unlikely people are falsely testing negative - because if that were so, they would falsely be getting all clear to go to work etc - and we would see more flow on cases with no known contact cause.
Social restrictions remain in place - but not as tight as some places, including eastern states of Australia.
All incoming people , with very few exceptions, whether from overseas or interstate, must self quarnatine for 14 days.
Yep, same for NZ - so much as a sniffle and you can get tested, and that will continue as restrictions lift. People are being encouraged to contact their GP or Healthline as soon as they feel unwell, because maintaining control requires identifying and isolating any new cases plus close contacts as quickly as possible.
We had a bit of a dip in numbers being tested (Australia did too), simply because there are fewer respiratory illnesses circulating due to the restrictions in place. We haven't actually had any days where full testing capacity was reached (day before yesterday was the highest, with 5289 tests processed, only 6 came back positive).
Here, we have a category of 'probable', for where a test result has come back negative, but all clinical signs point to COVID-19. So of our 1451 total, 338 are probable cases.
Wait. Are you saying they think the testing is not catching the Covid 19 cases, or....what does this mean? I mean, the virus is sequenced..it is or it isn't - pretty cut and dry. I don't get that "probable."
Of course, "probably" a lot of not-tested infected people and a lot who had it and recovered and never got tested.
Lots of ways this can be an majorly imperfect test system because people and chaos.
All the reporting I'm seeing says that the tests for active cases deliver a lot of false negatives. Not sure about false positives.
The antibody tests (to see if you were exposed and have recovered, possibly with minimal or no symptoms) apparently have both fairly high false negatives and false positives.5 -
...I find the differences between the numbers in various places (for example, NY and CA), even places following basically the same policies for the same amount of time intriguing, although no idea what the answers are.
My understanding is that CA started the mandatory social distancing policies several days before NY. Every day makes a huge difference in slowing things down. I think another big difference is that NY has a huge population all jammed up together in close quarters with a large share of that population using mass transit. CA has a huge number of people, but they are more spread out, and public transportation isn't used by the majority.7 -
corinasue1143 wrote: »
Oops! Non-hodgens, not leukemia.
Sorry, I don’t know how to post links, but maybe you can google it from this.
Thanks - that is super sad and incredibly infuriating. Several medical professionals were negligent here. How did he go from a mild fever to intubation? And post mortem-testing showed no COVID... so what prompted them to intubate, I wonder. I hope his family gets answers.0 -
Our governor has loosened the rules a little. We can get a haircut starting tomorrow. The 3 big cities with the most cases and deaths said, nope, not for us. We will stay in lockdown a little longer. The governor and the 3 mayors talked and agreed on this before it was announced.2
-
nutmegoreo wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Apparently there are a number of false negatives. Ross Douthat (the conservative NYT columnist) thinks he, his wife, and his son all had it, but Ross's test came back negative and his son's inconclusive, and at that point they were on the mend so did not retest. He was discussing the false negative issue on one of the episodes of his podcast (The Argument).
Actual REAL false negatives or someone like Douthat insisting that he is right and the test is wrong. I mean, that's pretty arrogant.
Kind of like me insisting me and my cat had it even though we didn't get tested?
Look up specificity and sensitivity. All lab tests have a degree of error with false positives and false negatives. I don't have time to explain it at the moment, but will try to get back to this later.
I read an article on medpage a while ago that said this particular type of testing yields about 20% false negatives. They compared it to trying to put out a forest fire when 1 out of 5 of the fires are invisible.5 -
Soooo, COVID Toes are now potentially a thing? https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandrasternlicht/2020/04/22/covid-toes-doctors-identify-newest-symptom-of-coronavirus/#27d158161048
Lots of really interesting potential symptoms popping up, and I think it just highlights how much we don't know.
Edited to add this article, which talks about blood clots being another potential effect of the virus. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/22/coronavirus-blood-clots/5 -
...I find the differences between the numbers in various places (for example, NY and CA), even places following basically the same policies for the same amount of time intriguing, although no idea what the answers are.
My understanding is that CA started the mandatory social distancing policies several days before NY. Every day makes a huge difference in slowing things down. I think another big difference is that NY has a huge population all jammed up together in close quarters with a large share of that population using mass transit. CA has a huge number of people, but they are more spread out, and public transportation isn't used by the majority.
Yes, I see those explanations, but the difference still seems huge. This article: https://www.vox.com/2020/4/21/21224944/coronavirus-hot-spots-covid-new-york-michigan-florida poses a number of reasons, including those, but it just doesn't seem entirely sufficient to me.
And based on the new possible infection rate numbers for LA County (which are pretty iffy still from what I've read), it would be less so:
"Skeptics have noted that the conclusions seem at odds with some basic math. In New York City, where more than 10,000 people, or about 0.1 percent of the population, have already died from Covid-19, this estimated fatality rate [based on the new LA numbers] would mean nearly everyone in the city has already been infected. That’s unlikely, since the number of new cases, and deaths, is still mounting, fast."
From here: https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/
There's a new studies out of China that suggest that not only are there numerous strains of the virus, but that some of the mutations are more virulent: https://www.jpost.com/health-science/coronavirus-has-mutated-into-at-least-30-different-strains-new-study-finds-625333
"The study could have future implications on the treatment of coronavirus, as several different strains have been found throughout the world. The United States, which has the world's worst death toll at 42,897, and 799,515 overall cases, has been struck by different mutations. New York, which itself had the worst death rate in the US, and the eastern coast show a strain of coronavirus similar to that found in Europe, whereas the western US has shown similarities with strains found in China."
I'm not sure I believe that (more confirmation necessary), but I do wonder.
On CA shutting down early, the Vox piece says: "The Bay Area issued the first shelter-in-place order in the US on March 16, and California issued a statewide stay-at-home order three days later — while New York didn’t impose its own mandate until March 22."
However, Chicago (and IL as a whole) imposed our shelter-in-place at the same time as CA, and yet the outbreak here seems much worse, even though it also seems likely it was spreading in CA earlier.
CA has had 35,396 positive cases, and 1354 deaths vs. 35,108 cases and 1565 deaths in IL, even though CA has 3 times the population of IL. (CA has tested more, but not if you adjust for it having more than 3x the population.)
Maybe weather is part of it (FL has had a lot of cases, but given many other factors, seems like more would have been expected), and Chicago relies more on public transportation, but it still seems odd.4 -
cmriverside wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »yes that is why I am confident we do have it under control in South Australia - and most other australian states.
Because very low number of new cases is not a reflection of less testing - in fact the opposite - as of a week ago, anyone with any flu like symptoms, no matter how mild, can be tested.
Of course there is the possibility of infected people not getting tested - but given high numbers of tests being done and very low numbers of community transmission, that would seem unlikely.
There is also possibility of false negatives - but I guess one has to have some trust in the system - and again very low numbers of community transmission would suggest it is extremely unlikely people are falsely testing negative - because if that were so, they would falsely be getting all clear to go to work etc - and we would see more flow on cases with no known contact cause.
Social restrictions remain in place - but not as tight as some places, including eastern states of Australia.
All incoming people , with very few exceptions, whether from overseas or interstate, must self quarnatine for 14 days.
Yep, same for NZ - so much as a sniffle and you can get tested, and that will continue as restrictions lift. People are being encouraged to contact their GP or Healthline as soon as they feel unwell, because maintaining control requires identifying and isolating any new cases plus close contacts as quickly as possible.
We had a bit of a dip in numbers being tested (Australia did too), simply because there are fewer respiratory illnesses circulating due to the restrictions in place. We haven't actually had any days where full testing capacity was reached (day before yesterday was the highest, with 5289 tests processed, only 6 came back positive).
Here, we have a category of 'probable', for where a test result has come back negative, but all clinical signs point to COVID-19. So of our 1451 total, 338 are probable cases.
Wait. Are you saying they think the testing is not catching the Covid 19 cases, or....what does this mean? I mean, the virus is sequenced..it is or it isn't - pretty cut and dry. I don't get that "probable."
Of course, "probably" a lot of not-tested infected people and a lot who had it and recovered and never got tested.
Lots of ways this can be an majorly imperfect test system because people and chaos.
IIRC there was an article somewhere about the portable testing equipment. I'll try to explain what I read, as I don't remember which news site I saw this on... I think it is the Roche portable tester that takes 5+ min. It can only be used to test 1 sample at a time and there were places with swabs waiting to be testes. They were keeping the swabs in some type of solution that is normally able to keep any viruses intact while waiting, but the solution causes a false negative in this case. The machine manufacturer put out an alert about this, so I guess they need to either wait to take a swab until the machine is available or keep the swab somewhere without anything added. After all, we know this virus survives on surfaces for a long time, so not sure why they needed to keep in any solution in the first place, but I admit I'm not exactly an expert in medical laboratory science.1 -
fitlulu4150 wrote: »I didn't have a chance to look back through all the posts today but wondered if anyone highlighted the fact that here in CA (Santa Clara County) bases on autopsy results of people who died at home, we had a COVID-19 death on Feb 7 and another on Feb 17 as confirmed by the CDC. The virus was here earlier than we thought apparently.
I just read a article on that. It spreading in CA by Jan seems somewhat likely at this point, and the first (2/7) death was someone who traveled a lot and worked for a company with people who traveled from Wuhan, as I understand it. So seems plausible.
The first identified case of person to person spread in Chicago (a man whose wife traveled to Wuhan) was on Jan 30, so it being earlier in CA seems quite likely to me and I'm not sure why this is being presented as surprising.
Unfortunately, the current discussion also seems to be that having it, especially a mild case, quite likely does not convey immunity.
Both of the early deaths in CA that were just discovered by autopsy were people with no travel history, which means it had to have been community spread.
ETA Source:
Coronavirus Death in California Came Weeks Before First Known U.S. Death https://nyti.ms/3atiJvW0 -
Thanks for all the varied responses to my false negative question.
It's a fascinating and frustrating thing, all of it. Regardless, the horse has left the barn. Or, herding cats, or whatever antropomorphic phrase applies here - and I thought of several!3 -
...I find the differences between the numbers in various places (for example, NY and CA), even places following basically the same policies for the same amount of time intriguing, although no idea what the answers are.
My understanding is that CA started the mandatory social distancing policies several days before NY. Every day makes a huge difference in slowing things down. I think another big difference is that NY has a huge population all jammed up together in close quarters with a large share of that population using mass transit. CA has a huge number of people, but they are more spread out, and public transportation isn't used by the majority.
Yes, I see those explanations, but the difference still seems huge. This article: https://www.vox.com/2020/4/21/21224944/coronavirus-hot-spots-covid-new-york-michigan-florida poses a number of reasons, including those, but it just doesn't seem entirely sufficient to me.
And based on the new possible infection rate numbers for LA County (which are pretty iffy still from what I've read), it would be less so:
"Skeptics have noted that the conclusions seem at odds with some basic math. In New York City, where more than 10,000 people, or about 0.1 percent of the population, have already died from Covid-19, this estimated fatality rate [based on the new LA numbers] would mean nearly everyone in the city has already been infected. That’s unlikely, since the number of new cases, and deaths, is still mounting, fast."
From here: https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/
There's a new studies out of China that suggest that not only are there numerous strains of the virus, but that some of the mutations are more virulent: https://www.jpost.com/health-science/coronavirus-has-mutated-into-at-least-30-different-strains-new-study-finds-625333
"The study could have future implications on the treatment of coronavirus, as several different strains have been found throughout the world. The United States, which has the world's worst death toll at 42,897, and 799,515 overall cases, has been struck by different mutations. New York, which itself had the worst death rate in the US, and the eastern coast show a strain of coronavirus similar to that found in Europe, whereas the western US has shown similarities with strains found in China."
I'm not sure I believe that (more confirmation necessary), but I do wonder.
On CA shutting down early, the Vox piece says: "The Bay Area issued the first shelter-in-place order in the US on March 16, and California issued a statewide stay-at-home order three days later — while New York didn’t impose its own mandate until March 22."
However, Chicago (and IL as a whole) imposed our shelter-in-place at the same time as CA, and yet the outbreak here seems much worse, even though it also seems likely it was spreading in CA earlier.
CA has had 35,396 positive cases, and 1354 deaths vs. 35,108 cases and 1565 deaths in IL, even though CA has 3 times the population of IL. (CA has tested more, but not if you adjust for it having more than 3x the population.)
Maybe weather is part of it (FL has had a lot of cases, but given many other factors, seems like more would have been expected), and Chicago relies more on public transportation, but it still seems odd.
I'm wondering about climate a bit because of the big difference in number of cases between North and South Italy.3 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »fitlulu4150 wrote: »I didn't have a chance to look back through all the posts today but wondered if anyone highlighted the fact that here in CA (Santa Clara County) bases on autopsy results of people who died at home, we had a COVID-19 death on Feb 7 and another on Feb 17 as confirmed by the CDC. The virus was here earlier than we thought apparently.
I just read a article on that. It spreading in CA by Jan seems somewhat likely at this point, and the first (2/7) death was someone who traveled a lot and worked for a company with people who traveled from Wuhan, as I understand it. So seems plausible.
The first identified case of person to person spread in Chicago (a man whose wife traveled to Wuhan) was on Jan 30, so it being earlier in CA seems quite likely to me and I'm not sure why this is being presented as surprising.
Unfortunately, the current discussion also seems to be that having it, especially a mild case, quite likely does not convey immunity.
Both of the early deaths in CA that were just discovered by autopsy were people with no travel history, which means it had to have been community spread.
ETA Source:
Coronavirus Death in California Came Weeks Before First Known U.S. Death https://nyti.ms/3atiJvW
The earliest one, at least, worked for an international company, which makes it likely she could have come into contact with someone who had traveled to China (or from China) in Jan. It doesn't necessarily mean it was widespread in CA in Jan (although I've always thought that was possible, even likely, given the lag between catching it and symptoms and the amount of travel between China and CA and work-related connections).
From the NYT piece I referenced before (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/santa-clara-county-coronavirus-death.html):
"A longtime friend said that on Feb. 2, Ms. Dowd had complained of flulike symptoms. Four days later, he said, she was working from home, still feeling under the weather. Her daughter came home and found her collapsed at the breakfast bar in her kitchen, according to the friend, who asked not to be identified.
Family members said they initially had wondered if Ms. Dowd had been suffering from Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Her work as a company auditor for her firm, they said, brought her into contact with employees from all over the world and involved frequent travel."0 -
snowflake954 wrote: »...I find the differences between the numbers in various places (for example, NY and CA), even places following basically the same policies for the same amount of time intriguing, although no idea what the answers are.
My understanding is that CA started the mandatory social distancing policies several days before NY. Every day makes a huge difference in slowing things down. I think another big difference is that NY has a huge population all jammed up together in close quarters with a large share of that population using mass transit. CA has a huge number of people, but they are more spread out, and public transportation isn't used by the majority.
Yes, I see those explanations, but the difference still seems huge. This article: https://www.vox.com/2020/4/21/21224944/coronavirus-hot-spots-covid-new-york-michigan-florida poses a number of reasons, including those, but it just doesn't seem entirely sufficient to me.
And based on the new possible infection rate numbers for LA County (which are pretty iffy still from what I've read), it would be less so:
"Skeptics have noted that the conclusions seem at odds with some basic math. In New York City, where more than 10,000 people, or about 0.1 percent of the population, have already died from Covid-19, this estimated fatality rate [based on the new LA numbers] would mean nearly everyone in the city has already been infected. That’s unlikely, since the number of new cases, and deaths, is still mounting, fast."
From here: https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/
There's a new studies out of China that suggest that not only are there numerous strains of the virus, but that some of the mutations are more virulent: https://www.jpost.com/health-science/coronavirus-has-mutated-into-at-least-30-different-strains-new-study-finds-625333
"The study could have future implications on the treatment of coronavirus, as several different strains have been found throughout the world. The United States, which has the world's worst death toll at 42,897, and 799,515 overall cases, has been struck by different mutations. New York, which itself had the worst death rate in the US, and the eastern coast show a strain of coronavirus similar to that found in Europe, whereas the western US has shown similarities with strains found in China."
I'm not sure I believe that (more confirmation necessary), but I do wonder.
On CA shutting down early, the Vox piece says: "The Bay Area issued the first shelter-in-place order in the US on March 16, and California issued a statewide stay-at-home order three days later — while New York didn’t impose its own mandate until March 22."
However, Chicago (and IL as a whole) imposed our shelter-in-place at the same time as CA, and yet the outbreak here seems much worse, even though it also seems likely it was spreading in CA earlier.
CA has had 35,396 positive cases, and 1354 deaths vs. 35,108 cases and 1565 deaths in IL, even though CA has 3 times the population of IL. (CA has tested more, but not if you adjust for it having more than 3x the population.)
Maybe weather is part of it (FL has had a lot of cases, but given many other factors, seems like more would have been expected), and Chicago relies more on public transportation, but it still seems odd.
I'm wondering about climate a bit because of the big difference in number of cases between North and South Italy.
Yes, that also supports that theory.1 -
@justsomeem and those in the medical field. Do you think the cause of painful toes could possibly be (at least partially ) poor circulation and the nerve pain and tingling it causes. My circulation is not the best, I have post shingles pain, and anything that causes me to go to bed a day or two means pain in the toes on the shingles side. Just a thought.3
-
cmriverside wrote: »Apparently there are a number of false negatives. Ross Douthat (the conservative NYT columnist) thinks he, his wife, and his son all had it, but Ross's test came back negative and his son's inconclusive, and at that point they were on the mend so did not retest. He was discussing the false negative issue on one of the episodes of his podcast (The Argument).
Actual REAL false negatives or someone like Douthat insisting that he is right and the test is wrong. I mean, that's pretty arrogant.
Kind of like me insisting me and my cat had it even though we didn't get tested?
I got sick in February - I live in the Bay Area and pretty close to Santa Clara. My job requires me to interact with foreign researchers - many of them Chinese nationals who travel here directly to consult with me. Anyhow, I got pretty darned sick and missed more than week of work. My wife caught it too and also spent a couple of weeks out. Seemed like influenza to me, even though I had my vaccination - constant mid grade fever for an entire week. My wifes version progressed into her lungs and she was hacking for quite a while and ended up with both a sinus infection and bronchitis from it. Took her about a month to stop hacking and took me just about as long to feel normal and not out of breath doing normal activities.
Was it Covid-19? Considering the testing Stanford has been doing it is more than a small possibility. However, it could of just been the Flu. People are forgetting that the regular rhinovirus and influenza are still out there and people are still just as likely to catch one of those.1 -
@JustSomeEm Thanks. I've heard from more than one experiencing a big toe/toes turning black/blue and painful. Bizarre-orama. I'm taking care of 5 seniors including 2 disabled veterans. I appreciate this. They have old injuries but not diabetes. They eat like birds for the most part. Not one of them is overweight or ever have been. Appreciate the heads up. They have a larger social circle and they're all sharing symptoms. It's their main topic of discussion on a daily basis.
GB all 'em. 5 -
Coriandue- That’s what I was wondering if it could be mini blood clots since the virus has caused heart issues . Also their saying foggy brain to trouble with emotions after. Might not be effecting things but causing blood clots all over leading to more noticeable issues.2
-
Our governor is catching quite a bit of flack for extending to May 15 before starting to roll out a soft opening. IMO, this is prudent and follows the guidelines set out by the White House to have 14 days of declining numbers before phasing in openings.
State wide, our curve has flattened, but we're not seeing overall declining numbers yet. There are currently two counties that are seeing a substantial surge in cases and a third that is still seeing increases, but starting to flatten out. Bernalillo County, Santa Fe County, and Taos County are currently seeing new cases and hospitalizations on the decline, but that has only been the last few days.
To me, this is all very promising and I'm optimistic that we will indeed begin to re-open after May 15th. Another thing that a lot of people don't seem to get is that we can't just open the flood gates...it's not going to go back to January on May 16...it will be quite a long time before things return to that kind of operation, but a lot of people here responding on social media seem to think "opening" is going to be just flipping a switch to full operations overnight even though the governor has repeatedly said that this will all happen in phases.6 -
I'm not happy about the fact we are opening recreation first (according to the Washington governor.)
Makes no sense. People are going to flock to parks and beaches and playgrounds.
I guess there's some reasoning behind it - not sure what. If you're going to let people get together in recreational ways, let them work. Much more important in my view.
I know I know, no one asked me.5 -
cmriverside wrote: »I'm not happy about the fact we are opening recreation first (according to the Washington governor.)
Makes no sense. People are going to flock to parks and beaches and playgrounds.
I guess there's some reasoning behind it - not sure what. If you're going to let people get together in recreational ways, let them work. Much more important in my view.
I know I know, no one asked me.
It also flies in the face of the argument that the important reason to get back to normal is economic. I agree, it makes no sense. But then, very little of this mess makes sense to me
4 -
@JustSomeEm
Okay, I just shared this with the folks and first thing came to their minds about Covid toes, sounds like symptoms of pneumonic plague.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/plague/symptoms-causes/syc-20351291
Then we took a trip down memory lane and they reminded me of a childhood friend and mother who died of the plague. They had rabbits/fleas and they carried it to the family. Their toes turned black/blue and their entire bodies before they died. It was a sad day.5 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Our governor is catching quite a bit of flack for extending to May 15 before starting to roll out a soft opening. IMO, this is prudent and follows the guidelines set out by the White House to have 14 days of declining numbers before phasing in openings.
State wide, our curve has flattened, but we're not seeing overall declining numbers yet. There are currently two counties that are seeing a substantial surge in cases and a third that is still seeing increases, but starting to flatten out. Bernalillo County, Santa Fe County, and Taos County are currently seeing new cases and hospitalizations on the decline, but that has only been the last few days.
To me, this is all very promising and I'm optimistic that we will indeed begin to re-open after May 15th. Another thing that a lot of people don't seem to get is that we can't just open the flood gates...it's not going to go back to January on May 16...it will be quite a long time before things return to that kind of operation, but a lot of people here responding on social media seem to think "opening" is going to be just flipping a switch to full operations overnight even though the governor has repeatedly said that this will all happen in phases.
The bolded seems sensible on the technical front, maybe less so politically (not saying that politics should drive!).
I can see the need to release opening-up rules somewhat before the actual event, to give businesses a little more planning/readiness time (something many haven't gotten with the steady march of quickly-imposed restrictions, in some regions).
But waiting as long as practical gives the opening-up rules the benefit of planning task forces having observed the states/countries that have opened up earlier, and maybe adjusting plans based on others' good or bad ideas.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions